this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

3894 readers
3 users here now

Rules:

  1. Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
1
Understandable, we should pay up (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
62 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Bravo, you’ve found the difference!

If marital rape was not an issue amongst GIs, it would not have driven their rate of rapes up. As we are concerned with actual rapes committed, and not arbitrarily excluding rapes because of legal definitions, it makes no sense to try to claim the lack of marital rape recognized by contemporary law to be at all relevant.

The comparability of arbitrarily picked numbers is in dispute which depends on the methodology.

Yet you aren't disputing the methodology, but the definitions of rape. Yet in your dispute of the definitions, you manage to define literally nothing that would create substantial discontinuity between the statistics being compared.

Fair, my time is better spent on people understanding the difference between “use comparable metrics FFS” and “numbers are useless”.

Comparable metrics like "Rape per capita" and "rape per capita".

But sure, go back to claiming that the numbers are wrong, and that I've inflated them fivefold, and then backtrack and completely reverse your argument into a dismissal of the applicability of those numbers once it turns out that the numbers are valid and are against your argument, not in support of it.

Pathetic.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

If marital rape was not an issue amongst GIs, it would not have driven their rate of rapes up.

Yet you aren’t disputing the methodology, but the definitions of rape.

Comparable metrics like “Rape per capita” and “rape per capita”.

Since 1944 rape was legally redefined and expanded 5-6 times in both France and England (i prefer not to get into the details...), some of the laws and significant societal changes, actual policing standards changed even after this book was written (2001) and published (2007). Even the non-conflict related stats have a disclaimer about cultural and legal differences limiting direct comparison, but most importantly the UN considers conflict-related sexual violence as its own distinct category (again you've compared conflict vs non-conflict stats).

But at this point I'll give in to your logic and conclude this discussion with this graph which clearly indicates "that by those numbers, it would be much safer to be a woman with an English man in 2007, than to be a woman with an English man in 2022."

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/sexualoffencesinenglandandwalesoverview/march2022